Re: Does the new LambdaMOO core support Web?

• Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 17:48:19 PDT
• From:
  Jay Carlson <nop@nop.com>
• Cc: MOO-Cows.PARC@xerox.com
• In-Reply-To: "Your message of \"Fri, 12 Apr 96 14:33:48 PDT.\" <v02130503ad947b6eb53a@[132.76.55.130]>fea"

Gustavo wrote:
> Rog wrote:

>> Hacking the server or doing anything that depends on DB file format
>> (which is only sparsely documented and likely to change) is a less
>> good idea.

> Allow me to disagree. From our experience, the simplest method for logging
> is to fileappend() using FUP. Simple, quick, no scale-up problems, doesn't
> change the size of the database, has many other advantages.

An even simpler method is to do your logging with server_log(), and
just pull your messages out of the log with cut or sed or whatever.

> Sorry, but the mentality of 'keep the server unmodified or die' is
> obviously wrong. Arguably MCP was 'bad', until the moment when Pavel
> added it to the server, and then it became kosher. Nah.

I assume you mean the out of band handling required for inbound
MCP....anyway, it's still a cost/benefit analysis between
incompatibility and security and convenience and etc.

With recent fixes to the db parser, running on a server with new
builtins isn't quite as catastrophic to compatibility as it used to
be.  That's only one factor, though.

> Sorry if anyone feels this to be a flame or flame-bait, it is not
> intended to be so. Bottom line - some applications benefit a lot
> from certain server modifications. This is one of them.

...depending on the other factors you face.

Jay Carlson
nop@nop.com    nop@ccs.neu.edu    nop@kagoona.mitre.org

Flat text is just *never* what you want.   ---stephen p spackman

• RE: Does the new LambdaMOO core support Web?
• From: bmgustav@bioinformatics.weizmann.ac.il (Gustavo Glusman)

• Prev: RE: Does the new LambdaMOO core support Web?
• Next: RE: Does the new LambdaMOO core support Web?
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows